The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20190866 Ver 1_Huntsman_100123_MY2_2023_20240122 MONITORING YEAR 2 ANNUAL REPORT FINAL HUNTSMAN MITIGATION SITE Wilkes County, NC Yadkin River Basin HUC 03040102 DMS Project No. 100123 DMS Contract No. 7891 DMS RFP No. 16-007728; Date of Issue: 11/13/2018 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00836 DWR Project No. 20190866 Data Collection Dates: February - November 2023 Submission Date: January 2024 PREPARED FOR: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 PREPARED BY: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 1430 South Mint St, Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 Phone: 704.332.7754 Fax: 704.332.3306 Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone 704-332-7754  fax 704-332-3306  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203 January 15, 2024 Mr. Matthew Reid Western Project Manager NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services Asheville Regional Office 2090 U.S. 70 Highway Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211 RE: Huntsman Draft MY2 Report Review Yadkin River Basin – CU# 03040102 Wilkes County DMS Project ID No. 100123 Contract # 7891 Dear Mr. Reid: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments and observations from the Huntsman MY2 Draft Report, received on January 2, 2023. The report text has been revised for the final submittal to reflect the most current condition of the site. Your comments and observations from the report are noted below in Bold. Wildlands’ response to those comments are noted in Italics. DMS’ Comment: Section 2.2 indicates invasive treatment occurred in June 2023. Table 14 shows July 2023. Please update for consistency. Wildlands’ Response: Wildlands confirmed that treatment of invasives occurred in July 2023. The report text has been updated accordingly. DMS’ Comment: Section 2.2 discusses small bare area near 208+50 on UT1 Reach 1. This is not shown on the CCPV. Please include on CCPV if the area is greater than the mapping threshold (0.1ac) and include in Table 5. Wildlands’ Response: The bare area is currently below the mapping threshold of 0.10 acres; therefore, it is not included on the CCPV or in Table 5. DMS’ Comment: Section 2.3 says 16 out of 17 cross sections are stable. Currently, there are only 16 total cross sections being monitored for the site. Please revise. Wildlands’ Response: The report has been updated accordingly. Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone 704-332-7754  fax 704-332-3306  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203 DMS’ Comment: Section 2.3 contains a short discussion regarding the isolated bed scour at XS10 and the resulting BHR of 1.3. It should also be noted that when the BHR is calculated using the AB bankfull area, the BHR is 1.0 as shown on Table 10. Wildlands’ Response: The BHR for XS10 was misreported on Table 10. The correct BHR is 1.3, and Table 10 has been updated accordingly. DMS’ Comment: In July 2023, a beaver dam was identified and removed. Please include this on Table 14. Wildlands’ Response: Table 14 has been updated accordingly. DMS’ Comment: Section 2.6 mistakenly says that several stream repairs were completed in MY3 on UT1 R1 and R3. Please update to MY2. Wildlands’ Response: The report has been updated accordingly. DMS’ Comment: The IRT requested a repair table be included that summarizes the repairs completed on the site during the 2023 Credit Release Meeting. Thank you for compiling and including the table as well as additional photos. Wildlands’ Response: Noted. DMS’ Comment: WEI is planning supplemental planting and hand repairs on piping structures in early 2024. Thanks for including the proposed species list. Please include updates in the MY3 report. Wildlands’ Response: Noted. DMS’ Comment: The geodatabase submitted with the draft is empty. Please check the database content and resubmit with final. Wildlands’ Response: The support files have been updated accordingly. Enclosed please find two (2) hard copies of the Year 7 Final Monitoring Report and one (1) USB with all the final corrected electronic files for DMS distribution. Please contact me at 704-332-7754 x101 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kristi Suggs ksuggs@wildlandseng.com Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL i HUNTSMAN MITIGATION SITE Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Project Attributes ....................................................................................................................... 1-5 Section 2: MONITORING YEAR 2 DATA ASSESSMENT .......................................................................2-1 2.1 Vegetative Assessment .............................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern and Management Activities ........................................................ 2-1 2.3 Stream Assessment .................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Stream Areas of Concern and Management Activity................................................................. 2-2 2.5 Hydrology Assessment ............................................................................................................... 2-3 2.6 Monitoring Year 2 Summary ...................................................................................................... 2-3 Section 3: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................3-1 Section 4: REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................4-1 TABLES Table 1. Project Quantities and Credits ..................................................................................................... 1-1 Table 2. Goals, Performance Criteria, and Credits ..................................................................................... 1-3 Table 3. Project Attributes ......................................................................................................................... 1-5 FIGURES Figure 1.0 – 1.2 Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) APPENDICES Appendix A Visual Assessment Data Table 4a-e Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Table 6 Areas of Concern and Repair Table Stream Photographs Additional Swale Photographs Vegetation Plot Photographs Areas of Concern and Repair Photographs Appendix B Vegetation Plot Data Table 7a-b Vegetation Plot Data Table 8 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Supplemental Planting Species List Proposed Species for Supplemental Planting - Winter 2023/2024 Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data Table 9a-e Baseline Stream Data Summary Table 10 Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Cross-Section Plots Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL ii Appendix D Hydrology Data Table 11 Bankfull Events Summary Table 12 Verification of Consecutive Flow Days Table 13 Rainfall Summary Monthly Rainfall Data Crest Gage Plot Appendix E Project Timeline and Contact Information Table 14 Project Activity and Reporting History Table 15 Project Contact Table Appendix F Agency Correspondence 2023 DMS Credit Release Meeting – WEI Response Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-1 Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW The Huntsman Mitigation Site (Site) is located in Wilkes County approximately 5 miles south of Ronda and 8 miles southwest of Jonesville, North Carolina. The Site is located within the North Little Hunting Creek targeted local watershed (TLW) Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040102020030 and will provide warm stream credits in the South Yadkin 03040102 (Yadkin 02) Cataloging Unit (CU). North Little Hunting Creek (NLHC) and its tributaries are classified as Water Supply III (WS-III) with additional protection for Class C uses. Table 3 presents information related to the project attributes. 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits Mitigation work within the Site included restoration and enhancement II of perennial stream channels. Table 1 below shows stream credits by reach and the total amount of stream credits expected at closeout. Table 1. Project Quantities and Credits PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES Project Segment Mitigation Plan Footage As-Built Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Credits Comments STREAM North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 722.905 717.000 Warm R 1.0 722.905 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, invasive species treatment, and protecting with conservation easement North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 1,027.718 1,033.000 Warm R 1.0 1,027.718 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, invasive species treatment, protecting with conservation easement, and bridge crossing UT1 Reach 1 1,432.561 1,433.000 Warm R 1.0 1,432.561 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, invasive species treatment, protecting with conservation easement, and bridge crossing Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-2 PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES Project Segment Mitigation Plan Footage As-Built Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Credits Comments UT1 Reach 2 244.166 244.000 Warm R 1.0 244.166 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, invasive species treatment, protecting with conservation easement, and road crossing UT1 Reach 3 217.715 217.000 Warm R 1.0 217.715 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, invasive species treatment, and protecting with conservation easement UT2 Reach 1 299.853 300.000 Warm EII 2.5 119.941 Partial channel restoration, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, protecting with a conservation easement, and bridge crossing UT2 Reach 2 286.763 287.000 Warm R 1.0 286.763 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, invasive species treatment, fencing out livestock, and protecting with conservation easement UT2 Reach 3 568.949 569.000 Warm R 1.0 568.949 UT2 Reach 4 522.002 522.000 Warm R 1.0 522.002 Barn Branch 287.612 289.000 Warm R 1.0 287.612 Old Bus Branch 87.471 88.000 Warm R 1.0 87.471 Restoring dimension, pattern, and profile, stormwater BMP implementation, reconnecting channels with floodplains and wetlands, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, protecting with conservation easement Rifle Tributary 252.855 245.000 Warm EII 2.5 101.142 Stormwater BMP implementation, partial channel restoration, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, and protecting with conservation easement Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-3 PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES Project Segment Mitigation Plan Footage As-Built Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Credits Comments Trapper Tributary 40.718 41.000 Warm EII 2.5 16.287 Partial channel restoration, riparian planting, fencing out livestock, and protecting with conservation easement Net Credit Gain for buffers wider than 30-ft: 181.720 Total: 5,816.952 1. Crossing lengths have been removed from restoration footage 2. No direct credit for BMPs. 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives The project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits. Table 2 below describes expected outcomes to water quality and ecological processes and provides project goals and objectives. Table 2. Goals, Performance Criteria, and Credits Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Improve the stability of stream channels. Construct stream channels that will maintain stable cross-sections, patterns, and profiles over time. Reduce sediment inputs from bank erosion. Reduce shear stress on channel boundary. ER over 1.4 for B- type and 2.2 for C-type channels and BHR below 1.2 with visual assessments showing progression towards stability. 16 Cross-sections will be assessed during MY1, MY2, MY3, MY5, and MY7 and visual inspections will be assessed annually. Most cross- sections (XS) show streams are stable and functioning as designed. Apart from XS10 (BHR of 1.3) all riffle XS BHRs are below 1.2. Restoration Level Stream Warm Cool Cold Restoration 5,397.862 Enhancement I -- Enhancement II 237.370 Preservation -- Credit Gain: Buffers > 30-feet3 181.720 Totals: 5,816.952 Total Stream Credit: 5,816.952 Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-4 Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Reconnect channels with floodplains and to allow a natural flooding regime. Reconstruct stream channels with designed bankfull dimensions and depth based on reference reach data. Remove pond above T2. Allow more frequent flood flows to disperse on the floodplain. Four bankfull events in separate years within the 7-year monitoring period. Three automated pressure transducers were installed on restoration reaches and will record flow elevations and durations. MY2: Multiple bankfull events were recorded on UT2 Reach 4 (CG2) and UT1 Reach 1 (CG3). No bankfull events were recorded on NLHC Reach 2 (CG1) in 2023. Restore and enhance native floodplain and streambank vegetation. Plant native tree and understory species in riparian zones and plant native shrub and herbaceous species on streambanks. Reduce sediment inputs from bank erosion and runoff. Increase nutrient cycling and storage in floodplain. Provide riparian habitat. Add a source of LWD and organic material to stream. Survival rate of 320 stems per acre at MY3, 260 planted stems per acre at MY5 and a height of 6 ft., and 210 stems per acre at MY7 with a height of 8 ft. 13 permanent and 4 mobile one hundred square meter vegetation plots are placed on 2% of the planted area of the Site and monitored during MY1, MY2, MY3, MY5, and MY7. MY2: 14/17 vegetation plots have a planted stem density greater than 320 stems per acre. Improve instream habitat. Install habitat features such as constructed riffles, lunker logs, and brush toes into restored/enhanced streams. Add woody materials to channel beds. Construct pools of varying depth. Increase and diversify available habitats for macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians leading to colonization and increase in biodiversity over time. There is no required performance standard for this metric. Visual assessment. N/A Diffuse concentrated agricultural runoff. Install stormwater BMPs in areas of concentrated agricultural runoff to diffuse and provide vegetated infiltration for runoff before it enters the stream channel. Reduce agricultural and sediment inputs to the project, which will reduce likelihood of accumulated fines and excessive algal blooms from nutrients. There is no required performance standard for this metric. N/A N/A Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-5 Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses. Establish conservation easements on the Site. Protect Site from encroachment on the riparian corridor and direct impact to streams and wetlands. Prevent easement encroachment. Visually inspect the perimeter of the Site to ensure no easement encroachment is occurring. No easement encroachments. 1.3 Project Attributes North Little Hunting Creek originates offsite to the west in the steep, forested Brushy Mountains. The stream gradually widens and flattens in slope as it travels downstream out of the mountains and flows through several agricultural parcels before it enters the Site. UT1 originates within the Site limits, north of Ingle Hollow Road, and flows under Ingle Hollow Road to join North Little Hunting Creek. Land use in the drainage area of UT1 includes agricultural fields and chicken houses. UT2 begins in steep woods offsite, enters the Site from the south, and joins North Little Hunting Creek within the project area. Old Bus Branch, Rifle Tributary, Trapper Tributary, and Barn Branch all originate within Site limits and are tributaries to UT2. Within Site limits, North Little Hunting Creek, UT2, and the UT2 tributaries all flow through actively grazed pastures. Table 3. Project Attributes PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name Huntsman Mitigation Site Project Area (acres) 17.7 County Wilkes County Project Coordinates 36.140689, - 80.932189 PROJECT WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION Physiographic Province Piedmont USGS HUC 8-digit 03040102 USGS HUC 14-digit 03040102020030 River Basin Yadkin River DWR Sub-basin 03-07-06 Land Use Classification 74% forested, 22% agriculture, 2% shrubland, 1% developed, 1% open water Project Drainage Area (acres) 1,416 Percentage of Impervious Area 0.23% RESTORATION TRIBUTARY SUMMARY INFORMATION Parameters North Little Hunting Creek UT1 UT2 Barn Branch Old Bus Branch Pre-project length (feet) 1,646 996 1,707 247 90 Post-project (feet) 1,750 1,894 1,678 289 88 Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined) Unconfined Moderately Confined Confined to Unconfined Moderately Confined Confined Drainage area (acres) 1,274 70 43 10 5.2 Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Perennial Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-6 DWR Water Quality Classification WS-III Dominant Stream Classification (existing) G4 C4/B4 A6, E5b B5a G5 Dominant Stream Classification (proposed) C4 B4a/C4b/C4 B5a, B5, C5 B5a A5 Dominant Evolutionary class (Simon) if applicable Stage IV-V Stage II-III Stage III Stage IV Stage III-IV REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Water of the United States - Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00836 Water of the United States - Section 401 Yes Yes DWR # 2019-0866 Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion in Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021) Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA) N/A N/A N/A FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes Yes Wilkes County – No Rise Certification Essential Fisheries Habitat N/A N/A N/A Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 2-1 Section 2: MONITORING YEAR 2 DATA ASSESSMENT The MY2 data collection was conducted between February and November 2023 to assess the condition of the project. The vegetation, stream, and hydrology success criteria for the Site follow the approved Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021). Performance criteria for vegetation, stream, and hydrologic assessments are located in Section 1.2 Table 3: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements. The Site will be monitored for a total of seven years, with the final monitoring activities scheduled for 2028. 2.1 Vegetative Assessment The MY2 vegetative survey was completed in July of 2023, resulting in an average stem density of 402 stems per acre for all monitored permanent and mobile vegetation plots (VP). The Site is on track to meet the MY3 interim density requirement of 320 stems per acre with 14 out of the 17 vegetation plots individually exceeding this requirement. Planted stems within the permanent vegetation plots exhibited an 85% survival rate with flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), eastern sweetshrub (Calycanthus floridus) and American beech (Fagus grandifolia) displaying the lowest survival rates individually. In MY2, 3 permanent vegetation plots (VP6, VP7, and VP12) failed to meet the MY3 criteria, each with a stem density of 243. Stems within VP6 were outcompeted by herbaceous vegetation and those in VP7 were disturbed by adjacent stream bed repairs on UT1; issues are further discussed in Section 2.2. VP12 stem mortality can be attributed to the shading of young stems by wetland plants including a hydrophytic common rush (Juncus effusus) and purple aster (Symphyotrichum puniceum) on the left bank of UT2 Reach 4. Refer to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table and Appendix B for Vegetation Plot Data. 2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern and Management Activities MY2 visual assessments reveal that a majority of the conservation easement is unaffected by invasive species. Localized patches of Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and callery pear (Pyrus calleryana) were treated with herbicidal applications in July 2023. Treatments were successful in reducing invasive species areas and are presently below the mapping threshold, therefore they are not shown on the Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) figures. Invasive species will continue to be monitored and treated as necessary throughout the monitoring period. Bare areas and areas of low stem density have vastly improved in MY2, as woody stems and herbaceous vegetation continue to become established throughout the Site. In February 2023, bare areas and areas of low stem density received soil amendments and were re-seeded and re-planted with approved species from the project’s Final Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021). See Appendix B for a list and quantities of the planted bare root stems. In July 2023, an additional round of soil amendments and native seed mix were applied to the bare areas mapped in MY1. Additionally, livestakes were planted along both banks for the entire length of UT1. Except for one small area in the left floodplain along UT1 Reach 1 near station 213+50, the bare areas have been successfully resolved in MY2. The bare area on UT1 Reach 1 is below the mapping threshold of 0.10 acres and therefore, is not depicted on the CCPV. Several areas of low stem density continue to persist on UT1 Reach 1, with localized occurrences on North Little Hunting Creek. At VP6 and the headwaters of UT1, herbaceous vegetation has outcompeted planted stems, resulting in an area of reduced stem density while poor soil conditions and moderately steep slopes have negatively affected the successful establishment of woody vegetation along mid-reach of UT1 Reach 1. Additionally, low stem density near VP7 was directly attributed to construction access during stream repairs discussed in Section 2.4. Areas of low stem density on the Site have a combined total acreage of 1.1 acres or 6.9% of Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 2-2 the total easement acreage. Management activities are planned for winter 2023/2024 and will include supplementally planting mapped areas of low stem density with approved species from the project’s Final Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021). Refer to the CCPV Figures 1.0 – 1.2 and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table. A list of the proposed plantings and quantities is included in Appendix B. MY2 visual assessments reveal that there were no easement boundary areas of concern. Wildlands staff walked the easement boundary and determined that signage and easement markers are sufficient and visible, the fencing is intact, and no encroachments have been identified. Wildlands will continue to monitor the easement boundary in MY3. 2.3 Stream Assessment Morphological surveys for MY2 were conducted in July 2023. Cross-section (XS) survey results indicate that channel dimensions are stable and functioning as designed on all restoration reaches with minimal adjustments. All sixteen (16) cross-sections are stable, with bank height ratios (BHRs) at or near 1.0, and bankfull dimensions within an acceptable range of the design parameters. Channel morphology continues to adjust along UT1 and portions of North Little Hunting Creek as the banks and floodplain become increasingly vegetated, as erosional areas re-stabilize, and as the channels move both on-site and off-site sediments through the system. Examples of these adjustments are exhibited as slight variations in cross-sectional areas and width-to-depth ratios as well as some aggradation in pools (i.e., XS2 and XS3) and isolated areas of bed scour at XS10, which has a BHR of 1.3. Wildlands will continue to monitor these cross-sections for signs of accelerated instability upon which management measures may need to be implemented. Refer to Appendix A for the visual stability assessment tables and reference photographs, and Appendix C for the morphological tables and plots. 2.4 Stream Areas of Concern and Management Activity The MY2 visual assessment revealed that the bed and banks on the majority of the project reaches are stable and performing as intended with only a few instances of scour or localized structure issues.  UT1 Reach 2: STA 216+00 to 216+75 – A lack of baseflow in this segment of stream was observed in late August. Wildlands installed a game camera in November 2023 to monitor baseflow and reassess the area in MY3.  UT1 Reach 3: STA 218+23 – A rock sill is piping resulting in a perched culvert. A repair was completed on this area in January 2023; however, the repair was unsuccessful, and the rock sill is piping again. To address this issue, Wildlands will repair the rock sill to backup water into the culvert in late 2023/early 2024.  UT1 Reach 3: STA 219+80 to 219+86 – There is localized scour on riffle XS10 resulting in undercut banks and bed scour. Wildlands will continue to monitor this area and will repair the area if needed. In July 2023, a beaver dam was identified and removed from Little Hunting Creek Reach 1. The dam on the Site did not impede stream flow, but Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) was contacted regarding safe and sustainable dam removal. Wildlands will continue to monitor project reaches for dams and beaver activity. Refer to the CCPV Figures 1.0 - 1.2 for the locations of the removed beaver dam. In the MY1 report, Wildlands documented several areas of concern that required mechanical repairs in MY2. All repairs were completed in January 2023 are as follows:  UT1 Reach 1: STA 210+50 to 210+70 – Riffle material was washed out of one of the previously repaired riffles resulting in some minor bed scour. Wildlands repositioned and embedded the riffle material in the degraded riffle, added a log sill at Sta 210+55, and installed livestakes on both banks along the entire length of UT1. Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 2-3  UT1 Reach 3: STA 218+23 – A rock sill was piping resulting in a perched culvert. Wildlands added geotextile fabric and rip-rap to the back of the rock sill to backup water into the culvert for aquatic passage. Since the repair was first completed, the rip-rap has washed downstream and the culvert is once again perched.  UT2 Reach 3: STA 308+00 to 308+30 – Hydrological seepage from a wetland area that abuts the reach resulted in stream bank slump and scour. Wildlands re-graded both banks, installed brushtoe, and re-seeded and matted the banks and floodplain. Wildlands will continue to monitor all areas of concern and document repairs and management activities, if needed, in the MY3 report. Refer to Appendix A for the CCPV Figures 1.0-1.2, Stream Condition Assessment Table, Area of Concern (AOC) and Repair Table, and the photologs. 2.5 Hydrology Assessment In total, 3 automated transducer type crest gages (CG) were installed on North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2, UT1 Reach 2, and UT2 Reach 4 to monitor bankfull events. In MY2, at least one bankfull event was documented on UT2 Reach 4 and UT1 Reach 1. With multiple bankfull events recorded for UT2 Reach 4 in MY1 and MY2, the hydrologic success criteria of four bankfull events in separate years has been partially met for the reach. Please refer to Appendix D for the hydrologic summary, data plots, and bankfull documentation. 2.6 Monitoring Year 2 Summary Overall, the Site is performing as intended, and is on track to meet most of the required stream, vegetation, and hydrologic success criteria for MY2. The average stem density for the Site is 402 stems per acre, which exceeds the MY3 requirement of 320 planted stems per acre. The Site is largely unaffected by invasive species, and streams on Site are mostly stable and functioning as designed. Geomorphic surveys indicate that cross-section bankfull dimensions generally match the baseline monitoring, with some minor adjustments. In MY2, at least one bankfull event was documented on UT2 Reach 4 and UT1 Reach 1. Several stream repairs were completed in MY2 on UT1 Reach 1 and 3. Supplemental planting, seeding, and the incorporation of soil amendments were also conducted in MY2 just upstream of the crossing in the left floodplain of UT1 Reach 1 and just downstream of the crossing in the right floodplain of NLHC Reach 2. The MY2 visual assessment revealed a few isolated areas of concern including areas of low stem density, as well as instances of minor bed scour, and structure piping. In early 2024, supplemental planting in areas of low stem density and hand repairs on piping structures have been proposed where needed. Wildlands will continue to monitor these areas and additional management actions will be implemented as necessary throughout the seven-year monitoring period to maintain the ecological health of the Site. Summary information and data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are available from DMS upon request. Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 3-1 Section 3: METHODOLOGY Annual monitoring will consist of collecting morphologic, vegetative, and hydrologic data to assess project success based on the goals outlined in the Site’s Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021). Monitoring requirements will follow guidelines outlined in the NC IRT Stream and Wetland Mitigation Guidance Update (2016). Installed monitoring devices and plot locations closely mimic the locations of those proposed in the Site’s Mitigation Plan. Deviations from these locations were made when professional judgement deemed them necessary to better represent as-built field conditions or when installation of the device in the proposed location was not physically feasible. Geomorphic data was collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site: An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). All Integrated Current Condition Mapping was collected by either a professional licensed surveyor or an Arrow 100® Submeter GNSS Receiver and processed using ArcPro. Crest gages, using automated pressure transducers, were installed in riffle cross-sections to monitor stream hydrology throughout the year. Stream hydrology and vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (NCIRT, 2016). Vegetation installation data collection follow the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008); however, vegetation data processing follows the NC DMS Vegetation Data Entry Tool and Vegetation Plot Data Table (NCDMS, 2020). Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 4-1 Section 4: REFERENCES Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook. Harrelson, C.C., Rawlins, C.L., Potyondy, J.P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p. Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.2. Retrieved: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs‐eep‐protocol‐v4.2‐lev1‐5.pdf. North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP), accessed at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Yadkin_River_Basin/2009% 20Upper%20Yadkin%20RBRP_Final%20Final%2C%2026feb%2709.pdf NC DMS. 2020. Vegetation Data Entry Tool and Vegetation Plot Data Table. Raleigh, NC. https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool/ NC DMS and Interagency Review Team (IRT) Technical Workgroup. 2018. Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter. Raleigh, NC. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2023. Rainfall data from 1/1/2023 – 11/27/2023 Applied Climate Information System (ACIS), North Wilkesboro 5.5 SE Station. Accessed October 27, 2023. https://agacis.rcc-acis.org/?fips=37193 NOAA. 2023. WETS data from 1992-2022. ACIS, North Wilkesboro Station. Accessed November 31, 2023. https://agacis.rcc-acis.org/?fips=37193 North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2008. Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin wide Water Quality Plan, accessed at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/BPU/BPU/Yadkin/Yadkin%20Plans/2010%20 Plan/Yadkin%202008%20Plan%20with%20IR%20and%20Bio%20Appendice.pdf North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2011. Surface Water Classifications. http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS). 2017. NCGS Publications. https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-carolina-geological- survey/interactive-geologic-maps NCGS. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina: Raleigh, North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Geological Survey Section, scale 1:500,00, in color. North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Accessed at: https://saw- reg.usace.army.mil/PN/2016/Wilmington-District-Mitigation-Update.pdf Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199. Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books. Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina. Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 14(1):11-26. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 2019. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed August 2019. Huntsman Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 4-2 Wildlands Engineering Inc. (WEI). 2022. Monitoring Year 1 Annual Report - Huntsman Mitigation Site. DMS. Raleigh, NC. WEI. 2022. Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report - Huntsman Mitigation Site. DMS. Raleigh, NC. WEI. 2021. Huntsman Mitigation Site Final Mitigation Plan. DMS, Raleigh, NC. Figures [ [[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [[[[[[ [[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [[ [ U T 1 UT 2 T r a p p e r T r i b Ri f l e T r i b Old Bus BranchBa r n B r a n c h UT2North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd Ingle Hollow Rd GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GFGF GF GFGF GF GF Sheet 1.1 Sheet 1.2 U T 1 UT 2 T r a p p e r T r i b Ri f l e T r i b Old Bus BranchBa r n B r a n c h UT2North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd Ingle Hollow Rd !P !P !P !P !P !P !A !A !A !A !( B Figure 1.0 (Key) Current Condition Plan View Huntsman Mitigation Site Yadkin River Basin (03040102) Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 2018 Aerial Photography 0 220110 Feet ¹ Wilkes County, NC Project Parcels Conservation Easement Restrictive Covenant Utility Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement II BMP No Credit Non-Project Streams [Fence Topographic Contours (20') Cross-Sections (XS#) !P Reach Breaks !A BaroTroll (BT) !A Crest Gage (CG#) GF Photo Points (PP#) GF Additional Photo Points (PP#a) Stream AOC and Repairs - MY2 !(Structure Issue B Removed Beaver Dam Scour/Incision Completed Repairs Vegetation Plots - MY2 Criteria Met (Permanent) Criteria Not Met (Permanent) Criteria Met (Mobile Plot) Vegetation AOC - MY2 Low Stem Density [ [[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ U T 1 UT2 North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd Ingle Hollow Rd GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF GF PP8a PP9a PP7a PP5a PP2a PP4 PP2 PP5 PP1 PP3 PP6 PP11 PP13 PP12 PP14 PP10 PP9 PP8 PP21 XS 3 XS4 XS1 X S 7 XS8 XS9 XS 5 XS1 0 X S 2 XS6 C G 3 CG1 CG2 BT 1 2 8 7 6 12 5 13 1 3 2 PP8a PP9a PP7a PP5a PP4a PP1a PP3a PP6a U T 1 UT2 North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd Ingle Hollow Rd !P !P !P !A !A !A !A !( B 99+82 315+00 314+00 313+00 220+31 220+00 219+00 218+00 217+00 216+00 215+00 214+00 213+00 212+00 211+00 210+00 209+00 208+00 207+00 206+00 205+00 204+00 203+00 202+00 201+00 200+00 114+00 113+00 112+00 111+00 110+00 109+00 108+00107+00 106+00 105+00 104+00 103+00 102+00101+00 100+00 Figure 1.1 Current Condition Plan View Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 2018 Aerial Photography 0 200100 Feet ¹Wilkes County, NC Project Parcels Conservation Easement Restrictive Covenant Utility Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Stream Restoration No Credit Non-Project Streams [Fence Topographic Contours (20') Cross-Sections (XS#) !P Reach Breaks !A BaroTroll (BT) !A Crest Gage (CG#) GF Photo Points (PP#) GF Additional Photo Points (PP#a) Stream AOC and Repairs - MY2 !(Structure Issue B Removed Beaver Dam Scour/Incision Completed Repairs Vegetation Plots - MY2 Criteria Met (Permanent) Criteria Not Met (Permanent) Criteria Met (Mobile Plot) Vegetation AOC - MY2 Low Stem Density [ [[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ UT 2 T r a p p e r T r i b Ri f l e T r i b Old Bus Branch Ba r n B r a n c h UT2 North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF PP4 PP5 PP3 PP7 PP6 PP11 PP23 PP26 PP13 PP14 PP22 PP20 PP27PP19 PP18 PP25 PP24 PP17 PP21 PP28 PP16 PP15 XS 3 XS4 XS8 XS9 X S 1 5 XS12 X S 1 1 XS13 XS1 0 XS16 XS14 CG1 CG2 BT 2 8 4 3 12 11 10 9 1 2 4 UT 2 T r a p p e r T r i b Ri f l e T r i b Old Bus Branch Ba r n B r a n c h UT2 North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd !P !P !P !P !P !P !A !A !A !( B 261+77 261+00 260+00 252+00 251+00 250+00 282+91 282+00 281+00 280+00 317+34317+00 316+00 315+00 314+00 313+00 312+00 311+00 310+00 309+00 308+00 307+00 306+00 305+00 304+00 303+00 302+00 301+00 300+00 220+31 220+00 219+00 218+00 217+00 216+00 215+00 118+94118+00117+00 116+00 115+00 114+00 113+00 112+00 111+00 110+00 109+00 108+00107+00 106+00 105+00 Figure 1.2 Current Condition Plan View Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 2018 Aerial Photography 0 200100 Feet ¹Wilkes County, NC Project Parcels Conservation Easement Utility Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement II BMP No Credit Non-Project Streams [Fence Topographic Contours (20') Cross-Sections (XS#) !P Reach Breaks !A BaroTroll (BT) !A Crest Gage (CG#) GF Photo Points (PP#) Stream AOC and Repairs - MY2 !(Structure Issue B Removed Beaver Dam Scour/Incision Completed Repairs Vegetation Plots - MY2 Criteria Met (Permanent) Criteria Not Met (Permanent) Criteria Met (Mobile Plot) Vegetation AOC - MY2 Low Stem Density APPENDIX A. Visual Assessment Data Table 4a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 717 1,434 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 1 1 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 8 8 100% North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 1,033 2,066 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 2 2 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 10 10 100% % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Table 4b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 UT1 Reach 1 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 1,433 2,866 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 28 28* 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 8 8 100% * An additonal log sill was added at station 210+45 in MY2. UT1 Reach 2 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 244 488 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 75 85% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 75 85% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 5 5 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 2 2 100% % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Table 4c. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 UT1 Reach 3 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 217 434 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 6 99% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 6 99% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 4 5 80% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100% UT2 Reach 2 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 287 573 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 14 14 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 0 0 N/A Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Table 4d. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 UT2 Reach 3 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 569 1,138 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 12 12 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100% UT2 Reach 4 Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 522 1,044 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 3 3 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 0 0 N/A % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Table 4e. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 Old Bus Branch Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 88 176 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 13 13 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 0 0 N/A Barn Branch Date Last Assessed: 10/17/2023 289 578 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100% % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Planted Acreage within Easement 16.00 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold (ac) Combined Acreage % of Planted Acreage Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.1 0.00 0.0% Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria.0.1 1.1 6.9% 1.1 6.9% Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard.0.1 0.0 0.0% 1.1 6.9% Easement Acreage 17.66 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold (ac) Combined Acreage % of Easement Acreage Invasive Areas of Concern Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short‐term or community structure for existing communities. Invasive species included in summation above should be identified in report summary. 0.1 0.0 0.0% Easement Encroachment Areas Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. none Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Total Cumulative Total 0 Encroachments Noted / 0 ac Date Last Assessed: 9/26/2023 Date Last Assessed: 09/26/2023 Table 6. Area of Concern and Repair Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 MY Documented ‐ AOC #1 Stream Name Station1 AOC Description Repair Date Repair Description Length (LF) MY0‐1 North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 RB: 102+25 ‐ 102+75 LB: 102+85 ‐ 103+00 Localized scour behind the top of bank. Wildlands re‐graded both banks, added riffle material to the channel, and re‐ seeded and matted the banks and floodplain. 65 LF MY0‐2 UT1 Reach 1 210+50 ‐ 212+00 Riffle material washed out of multiple riffles in this section from storm events and deposited downstream. Wildlands added and embedded riffle material on several degraded riffles from STA. 210+50 to 212+00, removed displaced riffle material from the pools, planted supplemental live stakes and herbaceous seed, and installed sod mats on the banks. 150 LF MY1‐1 UT1 Reach 1 210+50 ‐ 210 +70 Riffle material washed out of one of the previously repaired riffles resulting in some minor bed scour. Wildlands repositioned and embedded the riffle material in the degraded riffle, added a log sill at 210+55, and installed livestakes to the entire length of UT1. 20 LF MY1‐2 UT1 Reach 3 218+23 Rock sill was piping , which lowered the water elevation downstream of the culvert and resulted in a perched culvert. Wildlands added rip‐rap and geo‐textile matting to the rock sill. N/A MY1‐3 UT2 Reach 3 LB: 308+00 ‐ 308+36 RB: 308+00 ‐ 308+23 Wetland hydrology abutted the stream resulting in stream bank slump and scour. Wildlands re‐graded both banks, reinforced them with clay soil and brushtoe, and re‐seeded and matted the banks and floodplain.59 LF MY2‐1 UT1 Reach 2 216+00 ‐ 216+75 Lack of Baseflow observed on 8/24/23.N/A No repair needed at this time. Camera Installed on 11/13/23 to monitor baseflow. 75 LF MY2‐2 UT1 Reach 3 218+23 Observed on 9/26/23, the rip rap previously used for the rock sill repair was washed downstream causing the rock sill to begin piping again and returned the culvert to a perched position. Late 2023/Early 2024 Wildlands will repair the rock sill to displace water back into the culvert in late 2023/early 2024. N/A MY2‐3 UT1 Reach 3 219+80 ‐ 219+86 Localized incision on cross‐section 10. N/A No repair needed at this time. Wildlands will continue to monitor the area of localized incision and will report on conditions in 2024. 6 LF September 2022 January 2023 1MY = Monitoring Year, AOC = Area of Concern, RB = Right Bank, LB = Left Bank Stream Photographs Monitoring Year 2 Photo Point 1 – NL Hunting R1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 1 – NL Hunting R1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 2 – NL Hunting R1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 2 – NL Hunting R1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 3 – NL Hunting R1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 3 – NL Hunting R1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 4 – NL Hunting R1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 4 – NL Hunting R1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 4 – UT1 Reach 3 view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 5 – NL Hunting R2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 5 – NL Hunting R2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 6 – NL Hunting R2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 6 – NL Hunting R2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 7 – NL Hunting R2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 7 – NL Hunting R2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 8 – UT1 Reach 1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 8 – UT1 Reach 1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 9 – UT1 Reach 1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 9 – UT1 Reach 1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 10 – UT1 Reach 1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 10 – UT1 Reach 1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 11 – UT1 Reach 1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 11 – UT1 Reach 1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 12 – UT1 Reach 2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 12 – UT1 Reach 2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 13 – UT1 Reach 2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 13 – UT1 Reach 2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 14 – UT1 Reach 3, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 14 – UT1 Reach 2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 15 – UT2 Reach 1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 15 – UT2 Reach 1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 16 – UT2 Reach 1, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 16 – UT2 Reach 1, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 17 – UT2 Reach 2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 17 – UT2 Reach 2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 18 – UT2 Reach 2, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 18 – UT2 Reach 2, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 19 – UT2 Reach 3, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 19 – UT2 Reach 3, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 20 – UT2 Reach 3, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 20 – UT2 Reach 3, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 21 – UT2 Reach 4, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 21 – UT2 Reach 4, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 22 – UT2 Reach 4, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 22 – UT2 Reach 4, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 23 – Rifle Trib, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 23 – Rifle Trib, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 24 – Rifle Trib, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 24 – Rifle Trib, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 25 – Rifle Trib, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 25 – Rifle Trib, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 26 – Trapper Trib, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 26 – Trapper Trib, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 27 – Old Bus Branch, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 27 – Old Bus Branch, view downstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 28 – Barn Branch, view upstream (04/06/2023) Photo Point 28 – Barn Branch, view downstream (04/06/2023) Additional Swale Photographs Monitoring Year 2 Photo Point 1a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 1a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 2a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 2a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 3a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 3a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 4a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 4a – UT1 Reach 1, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 5a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 6a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 6a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 7a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 7a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 8a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 8a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 9a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 9a – Stabilized swale, view down valley (04/06/2023) Vegetation Plot Photographs Monitoring Year 2 PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 1 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 2 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 3 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 4 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 5 (07/26/2023) PERMANET VEGETATION PLOT 6 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 7 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 8 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 9 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 10 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 11 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 12 (07/26/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 13 (07/26/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 1 (07/26/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 2 (07/26/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 3 (07/26/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 4 (07/26/2023) Areas of Concern & Repair Photographs Monitoring Year 2 MY0‐1 – NL Hunting Reach 1, 102+25 ‐ 102+75 – Right bank scour before repairs (06/01/2022) MY0‐1 – NL Hunting Reach 1, 102+25 ‐ 102+75 – Re‐stabilized right bank after repairs (09/26/2022) MY0‐1 – NL Hunting Reach 1, 102+85 ‐ 103+00 – Floodplain scour before repairs on left bank (05/24/2022) MY0‐1 – NL Hunting Reach 1, 102+85 ‐ 103+00 – Re‐stabilized floodplain and left bank after repairs (09/26/2022) MY0‐2 – UT1 Reach 1, station 210+50 to 212+00 – Riffle scour before repairs (06/01/2022) MY0‐2 – UT1 Reach 1, station 210+50 to 212+00 – Re‐stabilized riffle after repairs (01/08/2023) MY1‐1 – UT1 Reach 1, station 210+50 to 210+70 – Riffle scour before repairs (12/08/2022) MY1‐1 – UT1 Reach 1, station 210+50 to 210+70 – Re‐stabilized riffle after repairs (09/26/2023) UT1 Reach 1, station 210+45 – Additional installed log sill after repairs (09/26/23) MY1‐2 – UT1 Reach 3, station 218+23 – Rock sill piping before repairs (09/27/2022) MY1‐2 – UT1 Reach 3, station 218+23 – Rock sill after repairs (01/08/2023) MY1‐3 – UT2 Reach 3, station 308+00 to 308+36 – Bank scour before repairs (12/08/2022) MY1‐3 – UT2 Reach 3, station 308+00 to 308+36 – Re‐stabilized bank after repairs (09/26/2023) MY2‐1 – UT1 Reach 2, station 216+00 to 216+75 – Lack of base flow (09/29/2023) MY2‐2 – UT1 Reach 3, station 218+23 – Rock sill piping, perched culvert before repairs (09/26/2023) MY2‐3 – UT1 Reach 3, station 219+80 to 219+86 – Isolated riffle scour (10/17/2023) APPENDIX B. Vegetation Plot Data Table 7a. Vegetation Plot Data Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 16 2022-04-07 2023-02-16 NA 2023-07-26 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 Asimina triloba pawpaw Tree FAC Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 4 4 Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub Shrub FACU Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 Fagus grandifolia American beech Tree FACU Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC 1 1 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 2 2 2 2 2 2 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 1 1 1 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Sum Performance Standard 13 13 11 11 11 11 10 10 12 12 6 6 6 6 15 15 13 11 11 10 12 6 6 15 526 445 445 405 486 243 243 607 7 7 5 5 6 4 4 7 23 27 36 30 25 33 33 27 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 11 11 10 12 6 6 15 526 445 445 405 486 243 243 607 7 7 5 5 6 4 4 7 23 27 36 30 25 33 33 27 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. Veg Plot 7 FVeg Plot 6 FVeg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 8 F Stems/Acre Species Count Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) Average Plot Height (ft.) Indicator StatusTree/ShrubCommon Name Veg Plot 5 F Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Dominant Species Composition (%) % Invasives % Invasives Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Table 7b. Vegetation Plot Data Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 16 2022-04-07 2023-02-16 NA 2023-07-26 0.0247 Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Total Total Total Total Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 4 4 3 1 1 Asimina triloba pawpaw Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 1 1 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 3 3 Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub Shrub FACU 1 1 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 3 1 Fagus grandifolia American beech Tree FACU 1 1 Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1 Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC 1 1 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1 1 1 2 1 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 2 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 1 3 4 2 Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 1 1 1 Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1 1 1 1 1 Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1 1 Sum Performance Standard 9 9 10 10 10 10 6 6 11 11 8 10 13 8 9 10 10 6 11 8 10 13 8 364 405 405 243 445 324 405 526 324 6 7 4 6 7 5 5 6 5 22 20 30 17 36 38 30 31 38 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 10 10 6 11 8 10 13 8 364 405 405 243 445 324 405 526 324 6 7 4 6 7 5 5 6 5 22 20 30 17 36 38 30 31 38 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Veg Plot 9 F Veg Plot 13 F Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded), species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Scientific Name Tree/Shrub Indicator StatusCommon Name Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Date of Initial Plant Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Veg Plot 10 F Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Planted Acreage Table 8. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2- 2023 Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives 526 2 7 0 445 2 7 0 445 2 5 0 567 2 8 0 486 2 7 0 445 2 5 0 607 2 9 0 607 2 10 0 567 2 8 0 Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives 405 3 5 0 486 3 6 0 243 3 4 0 486 3 6 0 445 3 6 0 364 2 6 0 607 2 9 0 567 2 9 0 567 2 9 0 Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives 243 2 4 0 607 2 7 0 364 2 6 0 364 2 6 0 648 2 8 0 445 2 7 0 607 2 10 0 648 2 8 0 567 2 9 0 Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives 405 3 7 0 405 3 4 0 243 2 6 0 405 2 7 0 526 3 7 0 445 2 10 0 567 2 10 0 607 2 8 0 607 2 11 0 Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives 445 2 7 0 324 2 5 0 405 2 5 0 405 2 5 0 283 2 6 0 364 2 8 0 567 2 9 0 607 2 11 0 Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives Stems/Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species % Invasives 526 2 6 0 324 3 5 0 445 2 6 0 364 2 6 0 526 2 7 0 526 2 9 0 Veg Plot Group 2 RVeg Plot 13 F Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 7 *Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F. Veg Plot Group 3 R Veg Plot Group 4 R Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Veg Plot Group 1 R Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 0 Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Veg Plot 10 F Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F Veg Plot 9 F Veg Plot 3 F Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 5 Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 5 Veg Plot 6 F Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Supplemental Planting Species List Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Indicator Status Planting Type Quantity Acer negundo Boxelder FAC Bare Root 10 Cornus florida Flowering Dogwood FACU Bare Root 10 Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak FACU Bare Root 10 Ulmus americana American Elm FACW Bare Root 10 Total 40 Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Indicator Status Planting Type Quantity Salix nigra Black Willow OBL Livestake 95 Salix sericea Silky Willow OBL Livestake 210 Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood FACW Livestake 210 Sambucus canadensis Elderberry FAC Livestake 115 Total 630 Open Riparian Buffer Planting Zone Streambank Planting Zone Proposed Species for Supplemental Planting ‐ Winter 2023/2024 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Indicator Status Planting Type Quantity Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore FACW Bare Root 15 Ulmus americana American Elm FACW Bare Root 15 Betula nigra River Birch FACW Bare Root 15 Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak FACU Bare Root 15 Fagus grandifolia American Beech FACU Bare Root 10 Nyssa sylvatica Blackgum FAC Bare Root 10 Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm FAC Bare Root 10 Total 90 Open Riparian Buffer Planting Zone APPENDIX C. Stream Geomorphology Data Table 9a. Baseline Stream Data Summary Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 12.4 16.3 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 17.0 44.0 2 48.0 220.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1.6 1.7 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 2.1 2.3 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)20.6 25.8 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 7.5 10.3 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 2.7 2 2.2 10.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 2.0 2.3 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 12.4 16.3 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 17.0 44.0 2 51.0 230.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1.6 1.7 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 2.1 2.3 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)20.6 25.8 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 7.5 10.3 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 2.7 2 2.2 10.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 2.0 2.3 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other (‐‐‐): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable 3.5 1.0 64.0 22.1 78.1 1.3 2.2 28.6 17.1 ‐‐15.00 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS G4 C4 North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) C4 22.0 29.2 16.6 1.3 1.1 0.0066 20.5 2.2 1.0 ‐‐ G4 100‐110 100‐110 37.8 105 110.0 114.8 17.0 ‐‐ North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 C4 15.00 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 1.2 1.2 0.0061 1.1 2.3 90.6 1.3 0.0049 23.0 1.3 27.9 ‐‐ 0.0053 100.0 2.0 2.0 0.0073 1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross‐section, in lieu of assuming the width across the floodplain. 0.0073 1.4 31.1 61.2 1.4 C3 Table 9b. Baseline Stream Data Summary Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 10.2 13.7 2 4.5 5.7 4.8 5.2 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 23.0 35.0 2 10.0 57.0 41.3 43.8 2 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.7 0.8 2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 2 Bankfull Max Depth 1.3 1.7 2 0.5 0.6 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)8.2 9.8 2 1.5 2.3 1.4 1.9 2 Width/Depth Ratio 12.7 19.1 2 13.5 13.9 12.3 18.8 2 Entrenchment Ratio 2.2 2.5 2 >1.4 >2.2 8.0 9.1 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.8 2 1.0 1.1 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 39.5 43.2 2 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity 1.1 1.3 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 0.0190 0.0595 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 10.2 13.7 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 23.0 35.0 2 11.0 25.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.7 0.8 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1.3 1.7 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)8.2 9.8 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 12.7 19.1 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 2.2 2.5 2 1.8 4.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.8 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other 2. Channel slope for UT1 Reach 1 is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface. (‐‐‐): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT1 Reach 1 0.6 1.0 27.00 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ C4b 7‐11 ‐‐ E4/C4 7.0 C4 & B4 3.4 1.1 UT1 Reach 2 6.2 6.2 0.0296 0.0243 1.2 42.3 0.4 0.8 1.5 2.6 5.2 31.8 14.6 7.4 6.8 1.0 27.00 ‐‐39 1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross‐section, in lieu of assuming the width across the floodplain. 0.6 0.0296 0.0380 0.0399 E4/C4 C4b C4b 7‐11 10.0 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 1.1 1.2 1.2 Table 9c. Baseline Stream Data Summary Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 10.2 13.7 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 23.0 35.0 2 12.0 26.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.7 0.8 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1.3 1.7 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)8.2 9.8 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 12.7 19.1 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 2.2 2.5 2 1.8 4.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.8 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 1 7.0 12.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.4 2.4 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other 2. Channel slope is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface. (‐‐‐): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable 0.9 3.4 11.7 2.9 1.0 53.7 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT1 Reach 3 6.6 0.5 6.3 18.4 0.5 3.0 14.3 27.00 ‐‐ E4/C4 C4b C4b 7‐11 11.0 15.3 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.0296 0.0310 0.0366 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ UT2 Reach 2 5.0 5.1 18.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 1.6 1.4 15.4 18.0 3.6 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.90 ‐‐44 A6 B5a B4a 2.8 0.0791 0.0830 0.0856 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 7.0 7.0 6.7 0.8 0.5 1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross‐section, in lieu of assuming the width across the floodplain. 3.5 5.0 0.8 1.0 2.6 4.7 1.3 Table 9d. Baseline Stream Data Summary Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 1 9.0 16.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.4 2.4 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 1 18.0 84.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 10.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other (‐‐‐): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable 0.90 ‐‐ 3.0 23.0 0.5 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN 0.8 7.5 13.3 2.9 0.5 2.6 17.1 MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) 3.4 UT2 Reach 3 6.6 0.4 16.3 3.1 1.0 E5b B5 10.0 1.1 1.4 3.2 33.7 21.3 0.5 0.4 10.0 1.1 0.0254 0.0300 0.0319 ‐‐ ‐‐ 0.6 4.5 2.2 15.8 16.3 3.6 0.8 1.3 1.3 1.0 0.90 ‐‐31 E5b C5 C4 UT2 Reach 4 8.4 6.0 ‐‐ C4b 9.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 9.0 1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross‐section, in lieu of assuming the width across the floodplain. 3.2 2.3 3.0 0.0254 ‐‐ 9.0 9.0 4.7 1.1 2. Channel slope for UT2 Reach 3 is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface. 1.4 3.2 2.9 3.2 2.3 0.0700 0.0128 ‐‐ ‐‐ Table 9e. Baseline Stream Data Summary Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 1 4.0 7.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.4 2.4 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 1 6.0 10.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.4 2.4 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 Other 2. Channel slope for Old Bus Branch is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface. (‐‐‐): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable 0.4 1.0 13.7 1.7 1.0 47.3 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) Old Bus Branch 3.0 0.3 3.7 6.4 0.3 0.9 10.3 0.10 ‐‐ G5 A5 B4a 4.0 4.0 4.9 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.0284 0.0900 0.1030 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Barn Branch 4.3 8.4 40.1 0.3 0.7 3.8 9.0 0.9 1.1 1.4 5.6 13.2 12.7 4.8 1.0 0.10 ‐‐52 B5a B5a B4a 6.0 6.0 30.2 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.0435 0.0520 0.0388 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross‐section, in lieu of assuming the width across the floodplain. 4.1 7.0 0.8 1.2 3.4 4.9 1.7 6.3 0.5 1.2 3.3 4.3 2.5 2.5 0.5 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1119.0 1118.8 1119.1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1113.1 1113.0 1113.1 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 0.9 0.9 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.0 1.0 1.0 Thalweg Elevation 1116.9 1116.8 1116.8 1113.5 1116.2 1116.0 1107.9 1108.8 1109.1 1110.8 1110.4 1110.5 LTOB2 Elevation 1119.0 1118.6 1118.9 1118.7 1118.5 1118.7 1113.4 1113.4 1113.4 1113.1 1112.9 1113.1 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.2 1.9 2.1 5.2 2.3 2.7 5.5 4.7 4.4 2.3 2.4 2.6 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)28.6 24.4 24.2 74.9 36.2 30.9 78.6 69.2 64.0 37.8 34.7 37.7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1158.4 1158.4 1158.3 -- -- -- 1152.8 1152.8 1152.8 1134.0 1133.9 1134.0 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 -- -- -- 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Thalweg Elevation 1157.7 1157.9 1157.8 1156.4 1156.0 1155.9 1152.1 1152.2 1152.2 1132.5 1132.4 1132.6 LTOB2 Elevation 1158.4 1158.4 1158.3 1157.9 1157.8 1157.7 1152.8 1152.9 1152.9 1134.0 1134.0 1134.0 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.6 0.5 0.5 1.5 1.8 1.9 0.6 0.7 0.7 1.5 1.6 1.4 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.4 1.3 1.3 7.5 7.9 7.1 1.9 2.3 2.0 5.2 5.6 5.3 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area -- -- -- 1117.8 1117.9 1117.2 1144.9 1145.0 1144.9 -- -- -- Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area -- -- -- 1.0 0.9 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.9 -- -- -- Thalweg Elevation 1132.0 1131.8 1131.7 1116.9 1116.8 1115.9 1144.3 1144.5 1144.2 1125.0 1123.9 1124.2 LTOB2 Elevation 1133.2 1133.1 1133.3 1117.8 1117.7 1117.6 1144.9 1144.8 1144.8 1126.9 1126.8 1126.7 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.3 1.6 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.5 0.3 0.6 1.9 2.9 2.6 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.3 6.7 8.7 3.4 2.6 5.2 1.4 0.7 1.0 8.8 12.3 8.4 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1125.7 1125.6 1125.6 1113.8 1113.8 1113.8 1137.1 1137.1 1137.0 1126.6 1126.7 1126.7 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 Thalweg Elevation 1124.9 1124.4 1124.5 1113.2 1113.0 1113.1 1136.7 1136.6 1136.3 1125.5 1125.7 1125.7 LTOB2 Elevation 1125.7 1125.8 1125.8 1113.8 1113.8 1113.9 1137.1 1137.0 1137.0 1126.6 1126.8 1126.7 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.8 1.4 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.0 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.4 4.6 4.7 2.2 2.3 2.6 1.0 0.7 0.9 5.6 6.6 5.3 1Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the as-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. UT1 Reach 2 UT1 Reach 3 UT2 Reach 2 UT2 Reach 3 Old Bus Branch Cross-Section 15 (Riffle) Barn Branch Cross-Section 16 (Riffle)Cross-Section 13 (Riffle) Cross-Section 14 (Riffle) Cross-Section 4 (Riffle) North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 UT1 Reach 1 UT1 Reach 2 2Low top of bank (LTOB) area and max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recorded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. Cross-Section 9 (Pool) Cross-Section 10 (Riffle) Cross-Section 11 (Riffle) Cross-Section 12 (Pool) Cross-Section 8 (Riffle) UT2 Reach 3 Table 10. Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Cross-Section 1 (Riffle) Cross-Section 2 (Pool) Cross-Section 3 (Pool) UT2 Reach 4 Cross-Section 5 (Riffle) Cross-Section 6 (Pool) Cross-Section 7 (Riffle) Bankfull Dimensions 24.2 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 21.9 width (ft) 1.1 mean depth (ft) 2.1 max depth (ft) 22.6 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.1 hydraulic radius (ft) 19.8 width‐depth ratio 78.0 W flood prone area (ft) 3.6 entrenchment ratio 0.9 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section Plots Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Cross‐Section 1 ‐ North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 0 10203040506070 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 102+25 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 30.9 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 26.9 width (ft) 1.2 mean depth (ft) 2.7 max depth (ft) 28.1 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.1 hydraulic radius (ft) 23.4 width‐depth ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section Plots Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Cross‐Section 2 ‐ North Little Hunting Creek Reach 1 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 0 1020304050607080 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 102+75 Pool MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 64.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 36.5 width (ft) 1.8 mean depth (ft) 4.4 max depth (ft) 39.4 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.6 hydraulic radius (ft) 20.8 width‐depth ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 3 ‐ North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 0 10203040506070 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 111+95 Pool MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 37.7 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 32.1 width (ft) 1.2 mean depth (ft) 2.6 max depth (ft) 33.2 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.1 hydraulic radius (ft) 27.4 width‐depth ratio 61.2 W flood prone area (ft) 1.9 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 4 ‐ North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 0 102030405060 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 112+90 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23)Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 1.3 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 5.1 width (ft) 0.3 mean depth (ft) 0.5 max depth (ft) 5.4 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.2 hydraulic radius (ft) 20.4 width‐depth ratio 41.3 W flood prone area (ft) 8.1 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 5 ‐ UT1 Reach 1 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots 1157 1158 1159 1160 0 10203040 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 204+50 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 7.1 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 9.5 width (ft) 0.8 mean depth (ft) 1.9 max depth (ft) 10.6 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.7 hydraulic radius (ft) 12.6 width‐depth ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 6 ‐ UT1 Reach 1 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 0 10203040 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 204+75 Pool MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 2.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 5.3 width (ft) 0.4 mean depth (ft) 0.7 max depth (ft) 5.5 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.4 hydraulic radius (ft) 14.0 width‐depth ratio 44.2 W flood prone area (ft) 8.3 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 7 ‐ UT1 Reach 1 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots 1152 1153 1154 10 20 30 40 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 208+35 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23)Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 5.3 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 5.7 width (ft) 0.9 mean depth (ft) 1.4 max depth (ft) 6.7 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.8 hydraulic radius (ft) 6.1 width‐depth ratio 42.2 W flood prone area (ft) 7.4 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/12/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 8 ‐ UT1 Reach 2 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 10 20 30 40 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 215+25 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/12/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 8.7 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 8.7 width (ft) 1.0 mean depth (ft) 1.6 max depth (ft) 9.6 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.9 hydraulic radius (ft) 8.7 width‐depth ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 9 ‐ UT1 Reach 2 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 0 102030 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 215+50 Pool MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 5.2 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 5.2 width (ft) 1.0 mean depth (ft) 1.7 max depth (ft) 7.0 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.7 hydraulic radius (ft) 5.2 width‐depth ratio 26.3 W flood prone area (ft) 5.1 entrenchment ratio 1.3 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 10 ‐ UT1 Reach 3 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 10 20 30 40 50 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 219+85 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 1.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 4.1 width (ft) 0.2 mean depth (ft) 0.6 max depth (ft) 4.4 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.2 hydraulic radius (ft) 17.1 width‐depth ratio 14.9 W flood prone area (ft) 3.6 entrenchment ratio 0.9 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 11 ‐ UT2 Reach 2 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 0 1020304050 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 305+15 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 8.4 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 9.0 width (ft) 0.9 mean depth (ft) 2.6 max depth (ft) 12.4 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.7 hydraulic radius (ft) 9.7 width‐depth ratio Survey Date: 7/13/32 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 12 ‐ UT2 Reach 3 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 0 10203040 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 309+00 Pool MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (7/13/32)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 4.7 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 9.6 width (ft) 0.5 mean depth (ft) 1.2 max depth (ft) 10.6 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.4 hydraulic radius (ft) 19.4 width‐depth ratio 35.9 W flood prone area (ft) 3.7 entrenchment ratio 1.1 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 13 ‐ UT2 Reach 3 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 0 10203040 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 309+30 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23)Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 2.6 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 6.6 width (ft) 0.4 mean depth (ft) 0.8 max depth (ft) 7.0 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.4 hydraulic radius (ft) 16.8 width‐depth ratio 34.8 W flood prone area (ft) 5.2 entrenchment ratio 1.1 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 14 ‐ UT2 Reach 4 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1113 1114 1115 1116 10 20 30 40 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 315+25 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 0.9 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 2.4 width (ft) 0.4 mean depth (ft) 0.7 max depth (ft) 2.9 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.3 hydraulic radius (ft) 6.3 width‐depth ratio 8.2 W flood prone area (ft) 3.4 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 15 ‐ Old Bus Branch Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 5 1015202530 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 261+50 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 5.3 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 8.7 width (ft) 0.6 mean depth (ft) 1.0 max depth (ft) 9.1 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.6 hydraulic radius (ft) 14.5 width‐depth ratio 39.0 W flood prone area (ft) 4.5 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 07/13/23 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Cross‐Section Plots Cross‐Section 16 ‐ Barn Branch Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 View Downstream 1125 1126 1127 1128 10 20 30 40 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 28+18 Riffle MY0 (05/15/22)MY1 (11/22/22)MY2 (07/13/23) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area APPENDIX D. Hydrology Data Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Reach MY1 (2022) MY2 (2023) MY3 (2024) MY4 (2025) MY5 (2026) MY6 (2027) MY7 (2028) North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 ‐ CG1 7/10/2022 ‐‐‐ UT2 Reach 4 ‐ CG2 5/26/2022 6/16/2022 7/11/2022 8/6/2022 8/30/2022 9/5/2022 11/11/2022 11/21/2022 1/15/2023 1/28/2023 2/17/2023 3/3/2023 4/28/2023 6/19/2023 6/26/2023 7/9 2023 7/15/2023 UT1 Reach 1 ‐ CG3 Gage Malfuction ‐ No Data Collected 1/25/2023 3/3/2023 4/28/2023 6/20/2023 6/26/2023 7/9/2023 7/16/2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Reach MY1 (2022) MY2 (2023) MY3 (2024) MY4 (2025) MY5 (2026) MY6 (2027) MY7 (2028) North Little Hunting Creek Reach 2 ‐ CG1 4/7/2022 ‐ 12/8/2022 245 Days 1/1/2023 ‐ 11/13/2023 316 Days UT2 Reach 4 ‐ CG2 4/7/2022 ‐ 12/8/2022 245 Days 1/1/2023 ‐ 11/13/2023 316 Days UT1 Reach 1 ‐ CG3 Gage Malfuction ‐ No Data Collected 1/1/2023 ‐ 11/13/2023 316 Days Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 MY1 (2022) MY2 (2023) MY3 (2024) MY4 (2025) MY5 (2026) MY6 (2027) MY7 (2028) Annual Precip Total1 59.16 57.03 WETS 30th Percentile2 33.41 30.67 WETS 70th Percentile2 60.93 56.28 Normal Yes Yes 1Annual precipitation data was collected from 1‐1‐23 to 11‐27‐23 and is derived from the climatological data for the North Wilkesboro 5.5 SE, NC weather station (NOAA, 2023) Table 11. Bankfull Events Summary Table 13. Rainfall Summary Table 12. Verfication of Consecutive Flow Days 230th and 70th percentile precipitation data derived from the WETS data for the North Wilkesboro, NC weather station (NOAA, 2023) ‐‐‐ ‐ No Bankfull events Monthly Rainfall Data Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 MY7 (2028) 30th and 70th percentile precipitation data derived from the WETS data for the North Wilkesboro, NC weather station (NOAA, 2023) Annual precipitation data was collected from 1‐1‐23 to 11‐27‐23 and is derived from the climatological data for the North Wilkesboro 5.5 SE, NC weather station (NOAA, 2023) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Jan‐23 Feb‐23 Mar‐23 Apr‐23 May‐23 Jun‐23 Jul‐23 Aug‐23 Sep‐23 Oct‐23 Nov‐23 Dec‐23 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n (i n ) Date Huntsman Monthly and 30‐70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall in 2023 North Wilkesboro 5.5 SE 30th Percentile 70th Percentile Crest Gage Plot Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n (i n ) El e v a t i o n (f t ) Monitoring Year 2 ‐2023 Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30‐Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile Huntsman: Crest Gauge #1 ‐North Little Hunting Creek, Reach 2 (XS4) Crest Gage Plot Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n (i n ) El e v a t i o n (f t ) Monitoring Year 2 ‐2023 Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30‐Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile Huntsman: Crest Gauge #2 ‐UT2 Reach 4 (XS14) Crest Gage Plot Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2023 Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n (i n ) El e v a t i o n (f t ) Monitoring Year 2 ‐2023 Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30‐Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile Huntsman: Crest Gauge #3 ‐UT1 Reach 1 (XS7) APPENDIX E. Project Timeline and Contact Information Table 14. Project Activity and Reporting History Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 Data Collection Complete Task Completion or Deliverable Submission N/A May 21, 2019 June 2019 June 2021 N/A April 2022 N/A April 2022 May 2022 May 2022 Stream Survey May 2022 Vegetation Survey April 2022 Year 1 Monitoring Stream Survey November 2022 Invasive Species Treatments July, September 2022 Stream Repairs September 2022 Vegetation Survey October - December 2022 Soil Amendments & Supplemental Seeding and Planting February and July 2023 Stream Repairs January 2023 Stream Survey Invasive Species Treatments Vegetation Survey Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Table 15. Project Contact Table Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 2 - 2023 Designer Aaron Earley, PE Construction Contractor Planting Contractor Seeding Contractor Nursery Stock Supplies Herbaceous Plugs Monitoring Performers Monitoring, POC Wildlands Construction, Inc. Fremont, NC 27830 PO Box 1197 Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. Charlotte, NC 28203 704.332.7754 Kristi Suggs Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. 1430 S. Mint St., Suite 104 Wildlands Construction, Inc. 704.819.0848 Year 3 Monitoring Year 4 Monitoring Charlotte, NC 28203 1430 S. Mint St., Suite 104 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 6 Monitoring Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)June 2022 January 2023 Year 2 Monitoring December 2023 July 2023 As-Built Survey Completed Planting Completed Construction (Grading) Completed Mitigation Plan Approved Activity or Deliverable Project Instituted APPENDIX F. Agency Correspondence 1 Sara Thompson From:Kristi Suggs Sent:Friday, May 12, 2023 12:08 PM To:Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA); Kimberly Browning Isenhour; Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Kichefski, Steven L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) Cc:Reid, Matthew; Paul Wiesner (paul.wiesner@ncdenr.gov); Aaron Earley; Sara Thompson; John Hutton Subject:2023 DMS Credit Release Meeting - Huntsman MY1 (WEI Response Follow-up) Attachments:Huntsman MY1 Credit Release Response to IRT.pdf Good morning, everyone! I wanted to follow-up with responses and addiƟonal informaƟon on a couple of quesƟons from the IRT in regard to the Huntsman MY1 Report. See below for the inquiry from the IRT, and WEI’s response. 1. The IRT asked if the repair work to stabilize the access road near the chicken houses had been completed.  Yes, it has been completed. Rip rap was added to each swale within the access road to act as a “ford-type” crossing to stabilize the crossing and slow down concentrated flow to minimize an outside source sedimentation into the easement. Photos of the completed work were taken in April 2023. I have included the CCPV map of the area for reference. Please see attached pdf. 2. Casey asked if the crest gauge on UT1 had been replaced.  Yes, it was replaced and has been successfully recording data since 12/30/2022. The last Ɵme the gauge was downloaded was on 4/20/2023. Please let me know if you all have any quesƟons. Thank you! KrisƟ Kristi Suggs | Senior Environmental Scientist O: 704.332.7754 x110 M: 704.579.4828 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 1430 S. Mint St, Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 Huntsman Mitigation Site Chicken House Swale Stabilization Photos Photo Point 2a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 3a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 7a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) Photo Point 8a – Stabilized swale, view up valley (04/06/2023) [ [[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [[ [[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ U T 1 UT2 North Little Hun t i n g C r e e k Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 2 Ingle Hollow Rd Ingle Hollow Rd !( !A !A !A !A !P !P !P GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF GF PP4 PP2 PP5 PP1 PP3 PP6 PP11 PP13 PP12 PP14 PP10 PP9 PP8 PP21 XS 3 XS4 XS1 X S 7 XS8 XS9 XS 5 XS1 0 X S 2 XS6 C G 3 CG1 CG2Baro t r o l l 1 2 8 7 6 12 5 13 1 3 2 PP8a PP9a PP7a PP5a PP4a PP2a PP1a PP3a PP6a 99+82 315+00 314+00 313+00 220+31 220+00 219+00 218+00 217+00 216+00 215+00 214+00 213+00 212+00 211+00 210+00 209+00 208+00 207+00 206+00 205+00 204+00 203+00 202+00 201+00 200+00 114+00 113+00 112+00 111+00 110+00 109+00 108+00107+00 106+00 105+00 104+00 103+00 102+00101+00 100+00 1140 1160 1 1 8 0 1120 Figure 1.1 Current Condition Plan View Huntsman Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100123 Monitoring Year 1 2018 Aerial Photography 0 200100 Feet ¹Wilkes County, NC Project Parcels Conservation Easement Restrictive Covenant Utility Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Structures Stream Restoration No Credit Non-Project Streams [Fence Top of Bank Topographic Contours (20') Cross-Sections Completed Stream Repairs - September 2022 !P Reach Breaks !A BaroTroll !A Crest Gage GF Photo Points GF Additional Photo Points Vegetation Plots - MY1 Criteria Met (Permanent) Criteria Met (Mobile) Criteria Not Met (Mobile) Vegetation AOC - MY1 Bare Area Low Stem Density Stream AOC - MY1 Bank Scour Bed Scour !(Structure Issue